Why does Brisbane only have 1 team?

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

See there's where I think we'd go wrong. We have a comp with a finite number of spots and only a certain amount of those can be allocated to SE Queensland. But do we really need a second team based out of Suncorp while areas such as Sunshine Coast (essentially Caboolture to Gympie) and West of Brisbane (Ipswich to Toowoomba) are left without teams? Brisbane city has a team, and it's (currently) the Broncos, like it or not. There are other areas in SE Qld that we as a game need to tap before we go back and start cutting up an existing market more finely.

Rule number one of national pro sports is you don't go starting new franchises where they'll cut into the market of an existing team. You put them where they'll grow the reach of the sport and lock out the competition (ie. AFL, Union, Soccer). Putting another team in Brisbane primaily to hurt those bastard Broncos or utilise one particular stadium just isn't the right motivation. Especially if it leaves an opening for a rival code to get in first on the Sunshine Coast or Toowoomba. This is a lesson we should already have learned. While we have teams treading on each other for the same territory and same dollar in Sydney, we leave the Central Coast open to the A-League.

None of this means we can't be creative about using a great venue like Suncorp. But rather than creating another Suncorp based side in direct competition to the Broncos, we should be treating Suncorp as a hub for blockbuster games across the wider region. Instead of another Brisbane city team, we should introduce two new franchises, one 70-100km north of Brisbane and one 70-100km west of Brisbane to go with the existing Titans based 100km south of Brisbane. If each of those three teams circling Brisbane played their six derby games against each other at the regional hub then there's an extra six 30,000+ crowds each year at Suncorp. Throw in one more high drawing home game from each of those three sides and you have 21 games at Suncorp each season.

But you don't just end up with a game in Brisbane city 7 out of every 8 weekends during the season. You also end up with 10 games on the Sunshine Coast, 10 games in Toowoomba and 10 games on the Gold Coast. Instead of ending up with teams in direct competition competing for the same fans and same dollar, we create teams that each have their own distinct market and sustainable support base. We cover the entire region, ensuring it's not just those fortunate enough to live in Brisbane city that have easy access to our game, while simultaneously leaving no area where rival codes can build a base without taking us on head to head.

For those Rugby League fans in Brisbane city who don't like the Broncos, they'd get a range of alternative games and alternative teams playing at Suncorp throughout the season. And for Rugby League fans in other parts of SE Queensland who find the trip to Brisbane city too far, there'd now be a local alternative. More games in Brisbane, more games at Suncorp, more accessibility to the game across the region and fewer openings for rival codes. It's win-win for Rugby League.

Leigh.

Poor Boy Blue?

 

[bobmar28]

I've suggested they use their own home ground because it gives them a sense of community ownership and engages them within the local community better. But if a 2nd Brisbane team plays full-time out of Suncorp that wouldn't bother me either.

It's no co-incidence that when David Gallop talks up a 2nd Brisbane team that he talks about it being based in Logan/Ipswich. I know Ipswich is West Brisbane but Logan City is south and is smack-bang between the City of Brisbane and Gold Coast City. This would be the LAST thing the AFL Gold Coast team needs. It's not just the extra NRL team and publciity and expansion that goes with having a game in brisbane every week it's also everything underneath - Under 20's team, junior development in a League stronghold.

It has to be Logan/Ipswich then.

 

[Mortar]

please tell me you understand basic accounting.

Perth Red was referring to revenue. You've countered it by referring to an asset.

I've countered nothing.

All i did was to show that the Broncos have the best return value for their sponsors. Which you do not seem to realise with your superior knowledge of accounting and business management brings in revenue from said sponsors which will in turn attract more; revenue and assets; due to the better return that they achieve.

The broncos perform better at this than the other struggling clubs, as well as the AFL, and maybe its just that is what hurts/irks some people.

It's ok to be jealous of your betters.

 

[Quidgybo]

Oh you must be a Broncos fan talking like that...it makes sense!

Not at all. I'm actually more likely to sympathise with the Broncos are scum point of view. But basing strategic decisions for the game's future on my feelings towards any particular club is just plain stupid.

I can't understand how fans of defunct Sydney clubs and fans of clubs with serious financial problems, look at population base and summarise that Brisbane can support another team.

Have we learned nothing in the last 15 years? Whether it helps your team or not, we need the NRL as a code to grow. Hurting the most (off field) successful club doesn't do that.

Over the next 30 to 50 years we need to be aiming to become the NFL of Australia. We won't have even a hope of achieving that sort of size and success if our strategy is to cut the successful teams down to size. The strategy needs to be to do whatever is needed to raise the rest of the competition to match and exceed that high benchmark. A lot of people point at the Broncos and dismiss them by saying if they had as much competition as teams in Sydney they wouldn't be doing nearly so good. Well exactly. The real difference between Queensland and NSW isn't the number of teams, it's that the teams aren't all living on top of one another. The last thing we want to do is replicate the problems that we've inherited in Sydney across the entire competition.

Sunshine Coast and Ipswich already have the grounds, they just need stadiums built. New clubs with local identity work.

This thread started from entirely the wrong premise. The question isn't why does Brisbane only have 1 team, but rather why does the second or third biggest Rugby League heartland on the planet, covering some 300km north to south and 150km east to west, have only 2 teams?!?

Leigh.

 

[Western_Eel]

Brisbane has only 1 team because it works, if you add another team it might not anymore, We dont want brisbane to turn out like sydney do we?

 

[ozjet1]

I've countered nothing.

All i did was to show that the Broncos have the best return value for their sponsors. Which you do not seem to realise with your superior knowledge of accounting and business management brings in revenue from said sponsors which will in turn attract more; revenue and assets; due to the better return that they achieve.

The broncos perform better at this than the other struggling clubs, as well as the AFL, and maybe its just that is what hurts/irks some people.

It's ok to be jealous of your betters.

the classic approach of a moronic investor.............ignores the how and why a number is what it is. were you burnt in the briscconn fiasco by any chance?

and unlike NRL clubs, the big AFL clubs dont rely on sponsorship $$$ as the great contributor to their revenue in such an unproportional manner. so even though the Broncos may have a bigger asset on their books here, the West Coast's, Adelaide's, Collingwood's, Essendon's & Hawthorn's each outstrip the income of the Bronco's in other areas and overall. and that's what Perth Red was alluding too.

 

[Fraser]

Tell me how cities like Melbourne and Perth can support 1 league team with next to no league presence why Brisbane (800k origin ratings) support 1 team?

Continuing to have the 1 team in Brisbane for the next 100 years wont achieve much.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Tell me how cities like Melbourne and Perth can support 1 league team with next to no league presence why Brisbane (800k origin ratings) support 1 team?

Continuing to have the 1 team in Brisbane for the next 100 years wont achieve much.

Spot-on.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Brisbane has only 1 team because it works, if you add another team it might not anymore, We dont want brisbane to turn out like sydney do we?

Rubbish - one team in Brisbane is not working. The Broncos crowds look great but the game is not reaching it's true potential by being so under represented in this stonghold.

In the April edition of 'Rugby League Review', they went through the top-25 man squads listed in the NRL season guide and tallied a breakdown of clubs, compeitions, regions, and states where players played their junior football.

Rugby League Review website link - http://www.rugbyleaguereview.com/

State breakdown -
NSW - 248 (includes ACT)*
Qld - 91
WA - 3
NT - 2
SA - 1*
VIC - 0
* Joel Reddy is listed and counted as both a Cronulla junior and a SA junior

Region / country / RU breakdown -
NSW Country - 132 (includes ACT)
Sydney - 116*
Rest of Queensland - 44
New Zealand - 40
Brisbane - 26
North Queensland - 21
England - 2
Rugby Union - 2
Fiji - 1
* Joel Reddy is also listed and counted as a South Australian junior

Going by those figures, it shows that Sydney alone (excluding NSW Country) produces far more more players than the whole of Queensland combined. On the other hand, Brisbane's uttery pathetic figure of just 26 players clearly shows that whilst all might look good on the surface with great crowds at Broncos games, if you scratch underneath it is clearly obvious that having just one team is in fact doing damage to the game in Brisbane. North Queensland's and Rest of Queensland's figures are very healthy, however, a 2nd Brisbane team is badly needed.

Not only is Brisbane not producing enough players of NRL standard by only having one team, it is turning away potential sponsors and fans from the game - possibly to other codes. 2 teams in Brisbane will on aggregate draw a lot more fans to the game than one team, and I don't think a 2nd team will affect Broncos crowds too much.

 

[TheBourbonBeast]

As someone who grew up in Toowoomba (been a brissy boy for 10+ years now..) i laugh at the suggestions of an NRL team in T-bar....And if they put one in Ipswich no way will Toowoomba people jump on that bandwagon. They would travel to games for sure, but in small numbers.

 

[Fraser]

As someone who grew up in Toowoomba (been a brissy boy for 10+ years now..) i laugh at the suggestions of an NRL team in T-bar....And if they put one in Ipswich no way will Toowoomba people jump on that bandwagon. They would travel to games for sure, but in small numbers.

Agreed. Whenever I've been out there that is where a lot of Brisbane fans are at anyway. They're about an hour's drive apart from each other, T-ba being 90 minutes from Brisbane. Another team at Lang Park = more league coverage = Less AFL dribble.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

As someone who grew up in Toowoomba (been a brissy boy for 10+ years now..) i laugh at the suggestions of an NRL team in T-bar....And if they put one in Ipswich no way will Toowoomba people jump on that bandwagon. They would travel to games for sure, but in small numbers.

Bourbon or other Brissie people.

I remember not long after the Crushers started, they were getting very good crowds before they turned to sh1t- due to poor on field performances. I was in a cab in Brisbane and I asked the driver how they managed to get good crowds when there was an established/successful team already. How did South Brisbane manage to attract a following early on? He said a lot of the locals were p1ssed off when the Broncos left Lang Park for QEII. He gave me the impression there's a rivalry across the river. If that's true, there's a good reason to have two teams or was he just taking the p1ss out of a Sydney wanker?

cheers

 

[TheBourbonBeast]

Bourbon or other Brissie people.

I remember not long after the Crushers started, they were getting very good crowds before they turned to sh1t- due to poor on field performances. I was in a cab in Brisbane and I asked the driver how they managed to get good crowds when there was an established/successful team already. How did South Brisbane manage to attract a following early on? He said a lot of the locals were p1ssed off when the Broncos left Lang Park for QEII. He gave me the impression there's a rivalry across the river. If that's true, there's a good reason to have two teams or was he just taking the p1ss out of a Sydney wanker?

cheers

There is a divide/rivalry but not a big one. I'm northside, but i dont feel any animosity to southside at all, though i tend to stay in my district a lot. Not exclusively, but generally.

Lots of factors for crushers folding, them being sh*t, with a poor roster being the main i think.

From this point in time all expansion teams have to look at the Titans closely, they are the model on which to base a new team.

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Bourbon or other Brissie people.

I remember not long after the Crushers started, they were getting very good crowds before they turned to sh1t- due to poor on field performances. I was in a cab in Brisbane and I asked the driver how they managed to get good crowds when there was an established/successful team already. How did South Brisbane manage to attract a following early on? He said a lot of the locals were p1ssed off when the Broncos left Lang Park for QEII. He gave me the impression there's a rivalry across the river. If that's true, there's a good reason to have two teams or was he just taking the p1ss out of a Sydney wanker?

cheers

They were the South Queensland Crushers, not South Brisbane Crushers.

There is a small north-south rivalry but it's definitely not enough to base a new team on. You'd be better off going for a Brisbane-Ipswich rivalry if you want to replicate the GC's success.